Independent Senator Bernie Sanders floated Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez as a potential presidential candidate in the 2028 elections, saying that even though it’s “her decision to make,” she is a “very, very good politician.”
Speaking to Axios, Sanders said that he has been “out on the streets with her” and noticed how she responds when people come up to her. “It’s so incredibly genuine and open.”
Ocasio-Cortez is seemingly positioning herself to run for higher office, whether it is challenging Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer for his seat or to make a run for president.
I really don’t understand the comments on these types of posts. Everyone is like “she should do the Senate I’m not sure she’s right/ready for president”. Why? Our current president is an 80 year old pedophile, our previous president was an 80 year old likeable moron…
You guys don’t want change you want you return to the status quo.
I don’t think it’s a matter of her being ready, I think it’s that she has a real chance of beating schumer, whereas with the presidency, I’m not even sure she could even manage to win the primary. If an old white dude like Bernie couldn’t beat Hilary and Biden, what chance does a Latina woman in her 30s have?
If an old white dude like Bernie couldn’t beat Hilary and Biden, what chance does a Latina woman in her 30s have?
I mean, if you completely ignore the DNC doing everything legally in their power to get in the way of Bernie and force feed Hilary in the first place… because they can’t allow anyone vocal about actual progressive ideas in a position of party power… yeah that’s what it looks like. But that’s a pretty big thing to just ignore.
I’m not ignoring that, that’s one of the massive hurdles she would have to overcome
AOC will need to clear the DNC hurdle whether she runs for House, Senate, or Admin. Look at Platner
Not legally. The head of the DNC had to resign, and their lawyers argued in court that because they were a private organization they didn’t have to follow their own rules.
No one was prosecuted so it was effectively deemed legal. That’s the end result.
Honestly, I think she has a great chance. People didn’t not vote for Hillary because she was a woman. It’s because she represented the establishment and inspired nobody. People didn’t not vote for Harris because she was a woman. It’s because she represented the establishment and inspired nobody.
AOC is a candidate who seems to actually represent change. She seems to listen to the desires of the people and follow that. She doesn’t just do what the donors demand. She has a chance because she does inspire people to see what could be, not just to repeat what is.
So then why did anyone vote for Biden, who represented the establishment and inspired nobody?
Because it was 2020 during the height of a botched Covid response and a few months after George Floyd. And Biden barely won. If you do the math, it was about 21,500 people across three states that determined the outcome, where them voting for Trump instead of Biden would have been an electoral tie that would have been decided by Pence. That’s a technical margin of 0.012% that Trump electorally lost by.
I’m not a political analyst, but my guess would be hope that he would be better. He proved that he wasn’t, which allowed Trump to come back because, despite everything, Trump did make promises to change things for regular people. Yes, they were lies, fear mongering, and about attacking a made up enemy, but he at least said something to make people think he would help them.
Because Biden was representing the establishment when they weren’t in power and the Republicans were actively blowing it. And he did a lot worse than he should have. That shouldn’t have been a squeaker election.
If Mamdani is an indication of anything, people will vote for leftist economic populism despite there being racial divides.
In the past few weeks and months, we saw in New York City that the majority of Jewish people still support Israel over Palestine. Yet, Mamdani has consistently pulled a plurality of Jewish support with double digit leads over the other candidates.
What this means is that Jewish people are just like any other American, and they are feeling the effects of this shit economy caused by Trump. Mamdani represents a bandaid to that more than the other candidates, so they’re going with that and ignoring Mamdani’s anti-Zionist and anti-Israel policy.
I don’t think it matters what candidate you push a campaign for if they run on Left populism. As we’ve seen with Platner in Maine, though, being a white male veteran doesn’t hurt either.
Mamdani is running for mayor of NYC.
NYC has had a majority (not a plurality) of votes go to Democrats in the presidential election back to 1952 and the last time republicans had a plurality was 1924. NYC is, sadly, not representative of the US as a whole. Also, he was going up against a man who may have surpassed ted cruz in terms of “unlikeable mother fucker”-ness
As we’ve seen with Platner in Maine, though, being a white male veteran doesn’t hurt either.
Platner is… a giant fucking mess. He has more red flags than fucking fetterman did (fun fact: He was batshit insane as far back as when he met Anthony Bourdain…), one of which being the nazi skull tattoo he had on his chest for 20 years and only removed once he was forced to during his, what, 3 months of a political career? Not to mention him having willingly joined Blackwater and his VERY questionable statements on sexual assault and his use of homophobic slurs as recently as 2020.
But, he kissed Sanders’s ring so he has the “socialist” vote and establishment Democrats support him for whatever reason (which should raise a LOT more red flags but…). And while I am not invested enough to personally verify, a few colleagues I have out in Maine insist that Smith-Rodriguez was basically the same platform but with actual details and action plans but eventually pulled out to support the mayor (?) on the grounds of platner’s horrific stances on sexual assualt and her being a victim of assault in the military.
I don’t think it matters what candidate you push a campaign for if they run on
LeftpopulismEditorialized that a bit but… I think that is the real key. The vast majority of people don’t actually care about policy or even basic human rights. They just want populist candidates. And that is not just limited to the US.
Which REALLY fucking sucks because… I’ve been incredibly critical of AOC’s career and I think she was THIS close to wearing clown shoes with the rest of The Squad. But she has demonstrated that she has strong political acumen. And when she does do shitty stuff, she actually owns up to it on social media/direct to constituents videos.There is always the need for MASSIVE grains of salt with any politician but… AOC seems to kind of be exactly what we should want out of a democracy. Someone who cares and has grand ambitions but also understands they are a servant of the people and speaks to The People.
She just was born too late considering both sides are very much at “I can excuse being a Nazi but I draw the line at… I’ll get back to you on that”
You’re right about NYC. But wins add momentum, which builds and proves the DNC wrong.
The more and more I hear about Platner, the less I’m willing to defend him. He’ll capture liberals, sure, and I prefer to have grace for people if they’ve shown that they can fix their shit and atone for what they’ve done in their lives, but he sure ain’t the perfect candidate. You’re right that we don’t want Fetterman again, which is why we need to be critical of Platner here and now and not Vote “Who” No Matter Who like many liberals are doing now. If he keeps making bad decisions, like Kamala did as soon as her 2024 GE campaign made it to the DNConvention, then it’ll suck. Janet Mills is an option, but she’s not perfect either.
If Platner can have good messaging discipline, keep his campaign to Leftist economic popularism, come out with policies that support that agenda that he’d like to see implemented in Congress, and stay woke, I think I might throw him more support. But these things build. Trust needs to be built. And we all know that trust can be destroyed faster than it can be built.
Americans want populist candidates, and Leftist economics are popular.
AOC has a good track record. I want to see her because the leader of the party. I think the establishment Dems and DNC ignore the reality in front of them that their underlying base is changing views (against neoliberalism), and AOC should lead that fight. I think she’d be better for SML instead of President tho. Because of what we said about NYC and NYS, because of how it votes differently from the rest of the country, I think she has a safer bet to oust Schumer and gain even more national notoriety as a SML. She’ll be setting the stage for the Dems, and hell, has more of a backbone than Jeffries ever will.
Lots to be excited for
Yeah… I am pretty sure “willingly joined Blackwater” and “had a nazi tattoo on his chest for 20 years” automatically kicks him off to “broke” with a shade of “holy fucking shit”. And while I do think people can, and should. be allowed to change, all signs are he very much hasn’t. Still using homophobic slurs as recently as 2020 and his defense of the nazi skull boils down to “I am a military historian AND terminally online but I have never seen an SS outfit or the Mitchell and Webb meme”
At best he is a deeply stupid person who should not be allowed anywhere near office. More likely, he thinks voters are deeply stupid. Just a question of whether he is a fetterman/sinema in disguse.
(Also apparently he says his stance on Israel and genocide is basically Kamala’s? Which is even funnier that there aren’t the “I refuse to vote for genocide, period” crowd out attacking him…).
But, he is popular and that is all that matters.
A meathead veteran running on a left populist platform is how you can get some of the MAGA working class votes. Platner is the opposite of an elite well spoken academic, than can actually appeal to the proletariat and petit bourgeoisie.
Bernie’s problem was that he wasn’t a democrat. I voted for him but I know a lot of people, like my parents, who are center-left who simply refused to vote for somebody who didn’t caucus with democrats. These are the same people who are already looking at people like Newsom.
Edit for clarification: I understand that the Bernie is considered to caucus with the democrats because he generally votes with them. However, those who used the term disparagingly as I referenced above don’t believe independents can caucus with any party and used that as an excuse to refer to him as a DINO and not caucusing or being required to caucus.
He always caucuses with Democrats. That’s how Dems held the Senate under Biden. Without Bernie they wouldn’t have had their 50. You don’t have to be in the party to be part of the caucus.
I get what you are saying but that’s not what the talking heads meant when they said that.
Those talking heads should probably learn what words mean before they used them then
I take “Caususes with” to generally means “votes more or less in line with” (I know that’s not really everything about it). What definition are you using?
Your parents aren’t “center-left” if they didn’t vote for Bernie.
It was the primary?
To be a latina woman in her 30s would be a definite pick for a presidency over a geriatric male (let’s be honest, I like Bernie Sanders but he is very old).
For such a job you’d want someone in their prime age with sharp attention span, with a forward-looking vision, not back. With multicultural experience to better communicate with the rest of the world.
I’m not an American so I can’t vote but I would definitely pick her out of those two.
So let her try to win the primary. If she doesn’t win, what difference would it make?
If she’s at that point, she probably didn’t run for senate
The comments are a classic example of what is actually meant by “You are not immune to propaganda”
We want this madness to end and to do that we need to appeal to the same sort of folks who buy Chevy Equinoxes.
Fuck em and fuck that weak shit.
The neoliberals fucked up and can get out of the way forever or we might as well ride this bitch of a species screaming into the abyss.
I totally agree but every damn car looks like an Equinox so I don’t think we can win a popularity contest.
At the end of the day, the POTUS is not just a party leader, it is a national (formerly world) leader. That involves being able to at least get SOMETHING out of the other side… unless you are just going to be a fascist dictator apparently.
But you can be damned sure that the news media would immediately attack any Democrat who tried that and lead the lynch mob themselves. So we need someone who knows when to “reach across the aisle” and when to say “Fuck off” because they have enough votes.
Traditionally? The Senate is a great place to learn how to do that. Because there are only 100 (actually 101) people and almost everyone is an established politician, you have to do a LOT more negotiation to get anyone to vote against party lines (usually by benefiting their constituents). Whereas the House is, historically, where randos show up and we are just lucky if they don’t eat crayons on camera. So “protest votes”/“meme votes” are more common and they are a lot more likely to break party lines because they know they are going back home next year or trying to join a lobbyist firm.
ANY Democrat would be better than the rapist in chief… maybe even fucking fetterman. But a stronger AOC can do a LOT more good down the line… if there is a down the line.
You guys don’t want change you want you return to the status quo.
You have to win to change things bruh. If you can’t focus on that even a little and focus only on what you want in a perfect world , then it doesn’t matter you want because you’ll never win.
All else being equal a white man less than 65 who believe 95percent the same things as AOC will get at least 5 percent more votes just like that, which is the difference between winning and losing.
I’m sure just one more centrist moderate trying to appeal to Republicans will definitely work this time…
In all seriousness, we (as Americans & people world-wide) desperately need genuine Progressives like AOC & Bernie. They are the only ones that consistently hard work hard to advance big, bold action that would actually help improve working people’s lives!
It makes me so mad because AOC is exactly the kind of candidate that Kamala tried to cosplay as for her campaign.
It’s so frustrating to see people drool over the fake as fuck version of AOC yet say AOC isn’t presidential material.
I want her to run for senate mainly because shes the best chance we have to unseat schumer, and that is important too. Id be happy either way honestly, but thats my preference.
deleted by creator
Being a woman wasn’t why Hillary and Kamala lost. Hell, Hillary had the popular vote, but Congress broke our electoral system in 1929, so that doesn’t matter anymore. So America did choose a woman.
deleted by creator
Under the Constitution of the United States, a person must be aged 35 or over to serve as president. To be a senator, a person must be aged 30 or over. To be a Representative, a person must be aged 25 or older. This is specified in the U.S. Constitution.
The US Constitution does not specify an age requirements for one to serve on the Supreme Court.
There are no specified age requirements to serve in a presidential cabinet —Wikipedia
Trump has proven the constitution doesn’t matter any more.
That’s so weird, I don’t know why I thought someone had to be 43 years old…
I would like to say: clinton didn’t lose because she’s a woman, she lost because she’s a sleazeball. harris didn’t lose because she’s a woman, she lost because she was courting the right wing for some reason. AOC can win because she’s not a sleazy right winging neolib. I’d vote for her for president.
I’m not saying you’re wrong, but don’t underestimate the role of misogyny. A commentator on a podcast i listen to was in the US in the run-up to the last election and they said that something they heard over and over again in the people they talked to was variations on “i hate Trump and everything he stands for, but i couldn’t trust the country to a woman”
I had one friend like this. Basically all he talked about was how much he hates Trump, then come election he said he wasn’t voting at all because “Trump is bad, but Harris is worse because she’s a woman”.
In the sake of honesty, it wasn’t just that. He also said a few times that she’s worse than Trump because she claimed to be from a working class family, but almost always it was that she was a woman that was his reasoning.
“Trump is bad, but Harris is worse because she’s a woman”
It is stunning to imagine somebody actually saying this out loud, conscious of what they are doing rather than mindlessly acting on biases without introspection like a normal moron.
But somehow I also have zero surprise about it. Even if it’s just a fake story you made up for Lemmy it doesn’t matter because it’s genuinely a mundane everyday concept in so much of the country. (middle aged USian white dude from a conservative family here, it’s been a long time but I’ve heard it all)
I feel like I’ve gained a new understanding of quantum superposition!
My SO phrased it as “I don’t think I can vote for a woman for president.” and so they didn’t vote at all.
An issue with the presidential race isn’t getting the republican vote, it’s getting the dems to actually show up.
I’m curious, what gender is your SO?
I’d assume a guy, but conservative culture and media convinces a lot of women that they themselves are made from lesser stuff and should generally be deferring to the men anyway.
deleted by creator
I almost thought the guy was doing a bit when I first heard it. I guess I always assumed misogynists would be more subtle about it. It was my first brush with someone that open about it.
I just don’t believe them anymore. I think they always wanted this and were embarrassed to be fascists.
Now that you suggest the idea, I wouldn’t be surprised. I’ve since booted the guy from my life (or at least as much as I could) but I wouldn’t surprised if this was the case based on some of the things he’s said.
I’m saying he’s wrong.
What you said is true. But any woman, even a great one, is going to have a tougher time than a man would. Sexism is still a problem in this country.
Sexism and racism. It’s absolutely foolish for anyone to think that Americans won’t abstain from voting, or worse vote against a woman or a non-white person. It’s abysmal to think about, but it’s true.
If a woman or a non-white person runs, there will be a subset of the population who refuse to vote for them specifically because of their race or gender.
It’s why the republicans always run an old white male asshole, because no one refuses to vote for old white male assholes specifically out of principle, but a large amount of people (larger than you or I would likely think) will absolutely vote against a woman or a non-white person specifically due to their race or gender.
It’s like you guys forget that Barrack Hussein Obama lead us to the largest victory in recent memory. The black guy with the Muslim name less than a decade from 9/11. He just never happened because if you tried to account for him, your whole theory would look like a steaming load.
I didn’t say that they couldn’t win, just that it was an additional hurdle a white man wouldn’t have. But I appreciate your strawman all the same, it is almost halloween.
Ok, some won’t, but not enough to prevent a black guy with a Muslim name from leading us to a supermajority win. If that’s your theory, then it’s worthless because it’s too little to matter when you put up an actually talented politician with an inspiring message. We should just do that, then we won’t have to wring our hands over whether you think they’re demographically optimal for the bigots in your head.
People had the same “what about the racists” message in 2008 and they all fell flat on their faces when the election happened and it had no meaningful impact. Obama won freaking North Carolina. The only Democrat to do so in the last 45 years.
You go ahead and keep pretending racism and sexism don’t exist, ostrich is the way.
Both Harris and Clinton position themselves as more of the status quo. Trump both time always positions himself as an outsider who taps into to racism and white rage. The only time you can win off a status quo type deal if the Dem admin was doing amazing during when they had power.
Yea, republicans piss on you and say it’s that guy, Dems piss on you and say it’s raining.
Atleast piss in my mouth and we’ll all be happy
Republicans eat asparaguses before pissing on you, Dems eat pineapple.
Republicans haven’t won reelection in two decades, and Bush’s was real iffy. The change bias goes both ways.
💦💦💦
Someone is staying hydrated.
she lost because she was courting the right wing for some reason
That certainly had a decent effect. She was an easy target. She’s not white, she’s a woman, Right there you lost almost the entire right. She was trying to court the Jews when Israel was ready to go to bed with trump. She was a 11:59pm changeover for a sick president that was already making some questionable calls. Most of what she was doing wasn’t wrong or bad, but it was easy to attack and impossible to defend.
2025 Project was being installed and is being orchestrated by professional incredibly well funded politicians with incredible levels of oligarch backing. No matter what she would have done, anything but an all out blue wave would not have stopped them.
But it won’t matter in the next election, they’re ready to read from the Russian playbook. It’ll be a mock election. Most of the republicans and a lot of the dems are complicit. Even if the left were to get in (0 change imo) they would just call in some left sleepers to switch the power back, we’re well and properly baked.
AOC can win because she voted against the rail unions. This pleases the donors
Support for what ever she decides is next, although I feel like the senate would be a better step. However the democrats dont really have a face to back that isnt some centerist that thinks its ok to play with the bully after they have taken your lunch money or someone that is older than Wonder Bread ™.
Imagine if AOC remained SML as long as Moscow Mitch.
AOC the SML of the USA
AOC SML or POTUS FTW
There’s no path where she becomes Senate Majority Leader. You don’t take the position off the corpse of your defeated opponent.
I’m not sold on his face, but I do like the way Pritzker swings a bat. He’s a bit centrist, but at least he’s a fighter.
His problem is he’s a billionaire. But as a stop gap, I think he could work.
At this point, he is a billionaire by choice. He could donate to groups that work towards equitable living for the marginalized, but he doesn’t. He only has a couple billion, but that’s enough to make a very real impact for a lot of vulnerable people. This is very nearly the trolley problem. He can do nothing and let a lot of people die or he can intervene and save most but not all.
As Rush said (the band, not Limbaugh lol), If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.
That is also the philisophical crux of The Witcher series (books and games, not the TV show now starring the least-hot hemsworth)
The show was such a disappointment. There was solid source material to work off of, and they just shit all over it. They did Henry Cavill dirty, and dragged the witcher IP through the mud so much so it will probably never be put on screen again to present the actual story.
You never know, Hellboy got 3 different incarnations within 20 years despite having been a relatively unknown property outside of diehard comic readers.
Sadly they got progressively worse.
Id argue that he made a choice to use that as a cushion to allow him to devote himself to public service. I dont k ow if that is true, but my u derstanding is that he inherited this money. Doesnt mean he hs the same mindset of the person who accumulated it in the firstplace. Sins of the father and all.
Agreed, but my point is that most of us don’t get to just choose to be a billionaire. He does. Because he could choose to fund different things or donate to groups and he chooses not to. I’m not indicting him on exploiting people to amass that wealth, but he has chosen to keep billions of dollars for himself when he could be putting a lot of his money towards fighting the very things he says we need to fight.
That doesn’t necessarily make him a bad person; he just could be a whole hell of a lot better. I could donate more and don’t because I’d like to one day maybe be able to work less than full time before I die. He could have decided to never work a day in his life and instead opted to work a public service job, so props to him for that, but there’s still more I think he ought to be doing in these dire times.
They are going to basically offer her Chuck’s Senate seat, unopposed, as long as she doesn’t go after the nomination that they have already awarded to Newsom. He’s the Next One Up!
Nooooooo!
He literally pushed to make being unhoused a crime.
Newsom is fine. The right smears him and California almost as much as they did HRC. Don’t go along with their propaganda.
There’s more than just the right’s propaganda here. He’s a better choice than any MAGA, surely, but not the “Dem” I’d want.
Newsom is not fine, fuck that guy
Unfortunately the way the system works, you basically have to vote for who you’d fuck less
The electorate is still as old as hell and won’t like someone younger than them.
That’s why Barrack Obama lost.
A female president of a normal age would be an amazing change for the US. Why does it always have to be geriatric males?
People thought the same when Obama was running.
Problem is, politicians tend to retire after the presidency. Obama could still be a really good senator, but that somehow never happens. So my fear about an AOC presidency is that it would cut her political career short. She’s already great in the House.
Yeah, that would be a shame. Although the shift in direction we could see switching from a Vance-run crumbling Trump regime to AOC would have SO much potential to do good for the US and the world that losing a couple decades of her as a vote in congress would be a bargain. Plus even in retirement she’d have a huge platform to influence hearts and minds.
Standard caveats and disclaimers apply, of course. That goes for everything from the 28 elections happening, to the US still existing, to the Earth’s biosphere still existing. __
She’s already great in the House.
Yet a lot more is necessary to fix the fascism in the US…
True. And her presidency could also inspire more people like her to go into politics. I retract my doubts. Go for it.
t would cut her political career short.
You mean early retirement?
Oh no, the tragedy… who’d want that?Her voters, perhaps.
Andrew Johnson did that
Easy to forget that 2008 was just three Democrats running for a book deal and twelve Republicans running to be Pope
I really hate to say this, but there’s no way a woman will win in 2028 (if an election even happens).
The vast centrist vote will go towards stability and a return to the ‘values’ they think have been lost.
It sucks a lot, but the only viable choice will be a white man. I hate this, but it’s true.
Walz is probably the most politically viable choice. Does that suck? Yeah. But pragmatically, it’s just true.
Sorry to be crass, but fuck that. Is anyone excited about the generic geriatric white male candidate? Tons of people love AOC and Bernie, too, for that matter. I think we need a candidate that actually inspires people. Someone that people want to vote for, volunteer for, canvas for, etc. Maybe I’m just a dreamer, though.
Hey man, I’m with you. This sucks a lot.
This situation is fucking terrible. Personally, I’d prefer Bernie would run himself, but he clearly doesn’t want to (and given his age, I can’t blame him).
To be completely honest, though, he’s got sort of a bad track record of backing other candidates, so if he’s endorsing AOC, that’s even more evidence she won’t win.
I agree with him on most things, and I’d absolutely back him as a candidate like 10 years ago, but he’s not a kingmaker. I wish we lived in a better world, but we don’t. Our world is fucking awful, politically speaking.
Frankly, I’ll vote for any democrat that challenges Trump. My logic is that only the Democratic Party has ANY actual shot at winning, so whether it’s AOC, Bernie, or he’ll even Vermin Supreme if they put him on the ballot. I will vote for a fucking brick if it’s a democrat and challenges Trump. It almost certainly cannot get worse.
Edit: and before people say Trump won’t be on the ballot in 2028… I wouldn’t be so sure about that lol. You hear/see the shit this guy says/does?
and before people say Trump won’t be on the ballot in 2028… I wouldn’t be so sure about that lol.
I think a large part of the problem is that he likely won’t be. He’s not in charge now, and once he dies in office, people will think the danger has passed.
The issue is people think trump is the cause rather than a symptom.
In 2028, especially if he’s dead and his grave is the county’s biggest toilet, many people will breathe a sigh and think everything has gone back to normal, ignoring that the real fascists are still in control. That will be when it becomes truly dangerous.
Trump is not in charge, and things will not change when he’s gone, but most people will think everything is fine then, and will go back to ‘politics as normal’.
Yep. People like Curtis Yarvin and Thiel and Musk and “JD” are quite a bit younger than the pedo-in-chief.
The donor class that supported the construction of all the systems of radical right wing epistemic closure, long before Taco came along, are not going away, and neither is their money. And neither are those systems. If anything, those systems are being honed and perfected to be even worse than ever before (cable and local news are nothing compared to things like TikTok for being able to control minds).
People might think that Gen Y or Gen Z will be pissed off to make real changes, but I don’t believe it, for two reasons. One is that I’ve seen the same claims made about boomers and Gen X. The second is that Gen Y and Gen Z are poised to be the biggest beneficiaries of the largest wealth transfer in history. I seriously doubt that will radicalize them, and there is not much evidence of any kind of a big progressive swell in either of them as-is.
You’re right, but more to the point: they’ve largely solidified changes to the system via Project 2025 that will take decades to reverse, if they can be reversed at all.
I’m not talking about philosophical or ideological changes, but real, tangible changes to laws that are impervious to differences in who’s president or what the political landscape is.
The damage is largely done now. Even if by some miracle of the electorate going against everything that’s ever happened in the history of the nation and defying people’s nature and misogyny and whatever, AOC was somehow elected, it will take decades to begin to fix this.
The fact that people don’t understand this only solidifies my assessment that there’s no chance she could be elected. People simply do not understand the current political climate.
I wish this pipe dream could be true, because that would be a much better world than the one in which we live.
Trump is not the cause, but he made it possible for these people to take power
Yeah, in the same way a cut allows you to get a staph infection.
But a hangnail or certain kinds of sex at a bad time can do that, too.
Trump is just the method of delivery. Staph was always there, waiting for an opportunity.
A woman will not win in America, probably for the next 40 years at least.
Bernies too old.
Walz actually would have me a little excited. He seems like a great person and a solid candidate.
I’d be more excited for AOC. It’s possible she wouldn’t have a chance, but if the will of the American people keeps disappointing, then at some point we have to hang it up and say we deserve what we get.
If we can’t vote in a woman at this point, then maybe the experiment really is over.
The problem isn’t their genitals. The problem is their policies.
Especially support for Israel.
They have their genitals deep in Israel.
I agree, but Walz would have to be allowed to be himself. They reined him in last election and that sucked. I want him to go unchained and I don’t want anyone trying to have him dial it back…we need someone that is giving good reasons to vote FOR them, speaking plainly and showing some fight.
I wish it were otherwise because I would so love to see AOC in that office. But I just think there is just so much misogyny in this country. And the only people that Taco has (supposedly) won against were women.
It’s wild that places like Japan - often described to Westerners as being very male-dominated, etc. - have beat us to having a woman in the highest office. I guess maybe it’s possible that we were projecting a little there, hmmmmm?
Well, I suppose a Walz/Cortez instead of Cortez/Walz ticket would be better than nothing.
white geriatric walking dead
All of American Politics for $500, Alex.
I really hate to say this
Come on, do you really think that though? gender is an issue to be factored in, but considering it the primary factor is a level of cynicism thats effectively bordering on hopelessness. Maybe you earned that cynicism, I get that, being a a real american lefty is hard lately. How about we stand behind someone who inspires? Who seems to care about the issues that affect the constituents? who at least seems to not be one of the bought and paid for AIPAC drones?
But you’d ponder running some asshat zionist like walz or shaprio instead, simply because they have a pecker and no tits? I dont think america is so far gone that they would pass up an inspirational human for a male human. And if we are, then its not worth fighting for anyway. If we are that far gone then its time for all of us to run.Reminds me of a quote from the green mile movie.
“I’m rightly tired of the pain I hear and feel, boss. I’m tired of bein on the road, lonely as a robin in the rain. Not never havin no buddy to go on with or tell me where we’s comin from or goin to or why. I’m tired of people bein ugly to each other. It feels like pieces of glass in my head. I’m tired of all the times I’ve wanted to help and couldn’t. I’m tired of bein in the dark. Mostly it’s the pain. There’s too much. If I could end it, I would. But I can’t.”Gotta keep fighting till its time to run, and then keep fighting after that, or we’ll be a disappointment to our kids.
I legitimately do.
well. shit. If we cant unite behind a good candidate because we think an asshat consolation candidate must win, I dont know how we win, because the asshat candidates always sell us out in the end. It the DNC way of things.
It’s the human way of things.
DNC or not, even if they were as perfect as you’d like them to be, trying to unite people on the left is like herding cats.
Have you tried having discussions with multiple people on the left? I’ll bet you have, and I’ll bet you’ve been frustrated.
The problem with any of left of centre is that we believe in things and aren’t a flock of sheep. That’s good, but also politically very bad for us.
even if they were as perfect as you’d like them to be
debateable. We cant grease the wheels of our government with massive amounts of innocent’s human blood. If we do that then we dont deserve to exist ourselves.
Unfortunately. zionists support war crimes, and you can depend on them causing more war crimes if they get power. I cant have that. I’d rather the whole system burn down around us, and lots of people think that way. I think people conflating red lines with “not being perfect” is leaning into excusing ourselves of our responsibilities to each other.
Are these voters in the room with us right now?
Yes, it must be Walz. Dont run a woman against MAGA.
Everyone who’s down voting you is in denial
I get it. The truth hurts, especially right now when what we desperately need is hope.
You’re 100% correct but last time the US ran on HOPE they got wedding drone strikes… I don’t have a whole lot of hope for them but maybe they can change that….
Quick edit: anything gives me more hope than the current shit sooooo
Walz has a hell of a lot more chance than aoc. And I really like him. And hes a lot better than most.
I’m a big fan of AOC, but I think I’d rather her wait until 2032. The next presidency (if there even is one) is going to be a fucking shitshow trying to clean up Trump’s messes. I’d rather her get the opportunity to be a “get shit done” President, instead of having to spend all her time rooting out Trump’s traitors in the government while getting villainized in the media.
I don’t know if AOC is the right pick but I do know she’s closer to the target than Gavin Newsom. Nothing against him, but the Democratic party needs a candidate that can inspire people.
But that’s getting ahead of things. First the american people need to primary ~50% of sitting democrats in the midterms.
There’s plenty to be against Newsome for considering he platformed fascists, attacks the homeless for fun, and isn’t supportive of the LGBTQ+ community.
I think she is smart enough to surround herself with intelligent people. And Newsom seems to have a much bigger ego which is not what I’m interested in, personally.
I appreciate Bernie for being an adult and helping to boost up the people that will be here after him.
Most every other politician, when they aren’t cramming their unqualified, entitled broodspawn where they don’t belong, is gnawing off limbs trying to make sure they’re entombed with their positions like the pharaohs.
I’m not sure she has the thunder she had in 2018. BUT If she calls for a general strike in the next 6 weeks, and then starts to be the lead organizer of said strike, she’s my gal. I really hope she learns from Bernie in specifically how he’s organized his national campaigns.
2018 was different I don’t blame her for being more outspoken then. I agree with the other commentor that she should run for senate. She’ make an excellent senate majority leader. If there’s still no female president by 2036 she’d probably be a layup at that point.
I don’t share the view that sexism is what is blocking a female president in the US; I think being an inauthentic corporate sellout is what has, so far, blocked a female president in the US. So that doesn’t factor in for me.
2028, should there be an election, is 100% in play for AOC.
And that actually is my biggest concern with AOC. Pelosi worked hard, from 2018-2020 to ice the FUCK out of AOC. And AOC stayed strong and outspoken. In fact, AOC in some ways was representing real leadership. When AOC ran again, won again, Pelosi instead of resisting, worked to bring her into the fold. And the strength of AOC’s rhetoric has diminished substantially. And AOC has become less and less outspoken and willing to target Democrats with criticism and become more and more of a “team player”. Now I’m not saying AOC is cooked, but she’s definitely on the stove.
Removed by mod
I don’t share the view that sexism is what is blocking a female president in the US
Me neither. 2036 is 3 elections away. Not exactly a long shot that the next 2 will be won by men. All I’m saying is that she’d probably be more effective in the senate (especially as leader) for the next decade and she’s young enough for a presidential run later.
She’d be empowered as SML and given her aptitude that’s why I think she’d be a layup for first female president afterwards.
Seems like the core argument is that AOC should wait a few cycles.
I question the strength of that argument given the nature of her approach to politics and our current/ ongoing political moment. She doesn’t get stronger as a candidate with time she gets weaker, more associated with the establishment.
The outsider lane is the strongest right now and it’s hers to take in 2028. Neither Pritzker or Newsom can take that lane. Why wait?
The core of my argument is that the senate needs AOC more than the executive branch. America needs functional legislatures more than the ideal commander and chief. Americans have fixated on the presidency for generations at the expense of functional house/senate/courts.
Why wait?
Because the senate is the real bottleneck; as we saw during Obama/Biden. Meanwhile 2028’s presidential race is a referendum on democracy regardless of who the DNC puts forward.
The core of your argument seems to place a higher priority on AOC winning the presidency than the actual outcomes. I’m arguing for what I see as best for USA, not AOC.
Given her aptitude I think she could win in the senate and would be an excellent majority leader. AOC would also not be required to resign as senate majority leader to run for president. IMO she’s one of the few people that could effectively campaign while maintaining her senate duties.
The higher priority is in winning the presidency, and regardless of what the constitution once said it was interpreted to mean, having an executive with the same political and ethical priorities as myself is of the highest priority. This is coupled with them being of the kind of person, like FDR, who be willing to assert the kind of executive authority established under Trumpism.
It is now established in the US that both the Congress and the judiciary are secondary authorities to the executive branch.
A meek, milquetoast Democrat, or a greasy centrist, or yet another billionaire, taking office and just trying to glaze over and return to a neo liberal business as usual would be disastrous for this country. We need bold reforms and it’s not going to come through the legislative when the scope of executive powers have been expanded as such There are plenty of adequate Democrats to fill this Senate seat, it’s not one that the DNC is at risk of losing. Democrats, however, have not been effective at winning the presidency.
AOC being effective 20 years from now is of almost no value because timing is everything. Also, it’s clear to me that Bernie has been grooming her for a Presidential run now for several years. He’s handing off the reigns to the movement he built. AOC has been tossed around as a potential presidential candidate since her first upset. She the obvious progressive pick.
Right now in the mix for 2028 the three names available to you are Newsom, Pritzker, and AOC. There are boomers and Jefferies and Buttegiegs of the world that might throw their names in, but they are way lower down the tier list.
Your perspective seems to be based largely out of parochial thinking that you know best where AOCs skills and aptitudes should be deployed, and that the"true power" of the government lay in the Senate. I don’t think your opinions are with soit because you are ignoring the entirety of the context of the current political landscape and the entire redefinition of the structure of power which has happened under Trump. Thankfully though, like I’ll be doing, opinions like yours will be recognized as the anachronism that they are by the politically savvy, this be dutifully ignored.
Thankfully though, like I’ll be doing, opinions like yours will be recognized as the anachronism that they are by the politically savvy
lmao k
sorry for having a different opinion than you. jfc buddy wtf.
I don’t share the view that sexism is what is blocking a female president in the US; I think being an inauthentic corporate sellout is what has, so far, blocked a female president in the US.
I sort of agree, but there is definitely enough sexism to knock off a couple percentage points. It’s possible to win and AOC has the right populist appeal that might actually get her elected, but both her gender and her latine name will give her more work than a cishet white man.
These aren’t barriers, but the are hurdles.
Our greatest recent win was with a black man with a Muslim name. Charisma and idealistic policy are way more important factors than all these excuses the centrists are throwing around now that the female nominee might not be a neoliberal. The same “but whatabout vagina” hand wringing surged when Warren was briefly leading the primary. And the same deferral to whatever prejudices are convenient to the end goal were brought out against Obama.
The same people promoting moderate Republican sensitivities as our guiding light are the ones who keep running shitty candidates and losing. They don’t know how to win elections.
I agree. That’s why AOC should focus on policies instead of identity politics. Because what I said is also true
Edit: I’m not saying she’s doing that, but dems have a history of trying and failing to fight cons on those terms
And the status quo liberals will coalesce like Voltron to stop her just like they did with Bernie.
Look at this point you could literally run George Washington himself as a Democrat and MAGA wouldn’t vote for him.
Also, compared to the current guy, a rancid portion of tuberculotic lung coughed up in a pool of fetid blood on the floor of some 18th century eastern European sanitarium is a “very good politician”.
I saw this coming a mile away and I hope she does win the Presidential Election to break barriers and to end the nonsense going on currently.
Problem is the conservatives will argue/debate no woman should be in power followed by countless historical references to prove their point. Then someone will show even more historical references of conservatives causing twice to three times the issues. This will turn into one giant circle jerk of why they (conservative) won’t listen to a woman when they don’t even listen to their own parents.
The greater risk isn’t misogynist republicans IMO, it’s misogynist liberals who will cynically use her gender and ethnic background as examples of her unelectability instead of addressing their opposition to her populist agenda.
“I don’t take issue wither her being a woman, but dumb rural americans will, so we can’t nominate her”
Every time a populist candidate gains momentum in the democratic party, democrats suddenly become greatly concerned about electability. See: Obama, Sanders, Mamdani, Fatah, ect.
Maybe if democrats placed as much emphasis on a popular policy agenda as they do on identity, they wouldn’t have as much of an electability problem.
It was wild seeing the libs blame lower turnout among black people for Hillary’s loss.
At no point did they question what policies lowered turnout, or address that white people, including women, voted Trump.
It’s wild until you realize just how fucked american electoral politics are.
The greater risk isn’t misogynist republicans IMO, it’s misogynist liberals who will cynically use her gender and ethnic background as examples of her unelectability instead of addressing their opposition to her populist agenda.
Spot on.
The greater risk isn’t misogynist republicans IMO, it’s misogynist liberals who will cynically use her gender and ethnic background as examples of her unelectability instead of addressing their opposition to her populist agenda.
See: This comment section. Same thing happened with Obama, same thing happened when Warren was briefly leading the 2020 primary. Demographic fretting always seems to go hand in hand with whether the candidate is talking about change.
Yep. I would love AOC to win but there’s no chance in America for that to happen. Our populace is deranged.
The people who would especially hate her would never vote for a non-republican anyway so ya’ll just need to get over it and just go for all-in.
Utterly boring “safe” candidates on the supposed left is how we got here in the first place. Give me a straight-up Marxist, just not with that messaging. And who would they be running against, Vance? Ha
Tons of liberals would never vote for a Marxist
No. Liberals are all cowards and will just have to suck it up and vote D.
Catering to liberal cowardice does nothing to expand the electorate.
They’re here on Lemmy saying they will only vote for a Marxist dream candidate. If the choice is MAGA fascism or an American neoliberal, they’ll sit out.
Not what I said at all
Third female candidate in four election cycles. I dunno, feels like we are asking to lose. And again, I would love to vote for her. Just don’t think the populace can muster it. I have lost all faith in Americans. The hope from Obama’s terms is completely gone.
The fun thing about intersectionality is that you could also look at her as the first latina candidate
But looking at what her politics are is somehow never the consideration. In terms of platform, she could hardly be more distinct from either Clinton or Kamala. I like the odds of popular socialist policies much, much better than focus-group tested middling capitalist policies.
Most lemmings do. But it’s about who can finish. I’ll vote for the candidate furthest to the left for as long as I can.
Yea, it wasn’t the support for genocide or the fact that she was running around with Liz Cheney for a lot of the campaign. Nope, it was all because she was a woman.
Be serious.
Trump was the alternative. Be serious.
It’s true, but we aren’t talking about that now are we? I imagine you’re trying to get at the fact that Trump is worse for Gaza and Liz Cheney is a “better” Republican?
There are/were a lot of people in the US who were/are getting incredibly fucking tired of the right-wingedneas of the Democratic primary. This party did not give them a primary to get to choose their candidate and then they ran a full-blown conservative who alienated their voter base to try to entice people out of a fucking cult. The Dems spat in the face of the people who wanted to vote for them while sucking off the people who would come to assassinate one of their reps and not give a shit about it.
It had nothing to do with her being a woman. Kamala Harris and Hillary Clinton were conservatives and people are tired of handing over “wins by default” to those people. I mean, look at how both of them who “totally cared so much about the US” just immediately faded into the background except for a book deal and you can see immediately why no one was buying their garbage.
If you think that any kind of intellectual examination was part of people’s decision making process last election, you are sorely mistaken. It really surprises me that on Lemmy, people think that 90% of voters even think about these things. They don’t. And they won’t. Look at the polling leading up to 2024. Harris was ahead for quite a bit. As the day got closer and Trump started running tabloid ads about trans and immigrants, the polls shifted.
The shift in polling had nothing to do with these nuanced takes about centrists and war hawks and corporate Democrats. Nothing. The masses voted based on last minute bigoted propaganda and claimed it was about the economy.
Your reasoning may apply in small, isolated circles. We are talking about the masses and no, I don’t buy it. I’ve talked to too many people.
Obama was charismatic. Clinton and Harris were not. That’s the killer difference between them, not that “black/Muslim” was somehow an easier demographic to sell than “woman”.
It literally was easier to sell. I dunno how much evidence Americans need to see before they understand that there is a strong bias against female leaders. Especially for president… wild that so many on here think these are principled decisions people are making rofl.
She’d face the exact same misogyny that Harris did, the difference though would be she’d have a strong enthusiastic volunteer base behind her. I think if the election is fair she’d have very good odds.
We tried Clinton. We tried Harris. I know the conditions are different, but do we really want to risk it when abject fascism is the consequence?
I think having an authentic populist voice is more important than any race or gender considerations. We simply don’t have another candidate that can do this as credibly as AOC. I think if she runs, in the primary, she’ll handily beat out Newsom, Pritzker or any other white guys in the party who are in a position to run.
Yes!? Clinton was the worst possible candidate for that election and Harris just isn’t a good politician and was utterly sabotaged from Biden among other things waiting waaaaay too long to drop out.
Running a milqtoast centrist is just fascism with extra steps. They will do nothing of substance and then people will vote for fascists to enact change.
I agree but the issue isn’t what is right. It’s about getting the candidate over the finish line.
I’m not going to go for fascism with extra steps when there is even the slightest chance of something better.
So when the primary is done and the candidates are a centrist vs fascist, you’re going to sit out?
We tried neoliberal. We tried neoliberal. Can we really risk it when fascism is the consequence?
Notice how you only focus on a single one of their shared characteristics to say it’s too risky?
Acting like the average American even knows what a neoliberal is. Lol!
They didn’t know terminology. They know it’s boring and doesn’t help them.
You’re making my point for me while trying to be contrarian.
Quit with this shit. Hillary won the popular vote, America will vote for a woman.
Hillary won the popular vote as a bland corporate candidate.
Seriously. A bland corporate candidate who gave the opposition two decades of lead time to build up an opposition strategy. One of the worst candidates to have run of all time.
Hillary won the popular vote and still lost in a system where the popular vote doesn’t matter. We have a rigged system. I voted for Hillary. It’s not that I don’t have faith in our candidates. I don’t have faith in the system and my fellow Americans.
Hillary won the popular vote and people fucking hated her.
America will vote for a woman.
Not where it counts.
Love the optimism that there will be elections in the US in the foreseeable future!
As inappropriate and watered down as it sounds, I honestly don’t think this country is going to vote in a female president this decade. Race plays a part too, but I honestly think that this country is more sexist than it is racist when it comes to presidential voting. It’s partially a gut feelings, but I think gender played a bigger role than many people think in the 2016 and 2024 elections. As messed up as it sounds, I think Bernie POTUS with AOC VP would stand a better chance of winning right now as opposed to the other way around. Even with all of the socialist/communist boogie-man bullshit that Bernie gets thrown at him.
I mean how many times do we have to learn the hard way that America won’t elect a woman to be president?
Look at this country.
It’s a shitshow.
It didn’t elect a woman when the other option was a felon, rapist, insurrectionist manchild with one failed presidency and two impeachments already under his belt.
Do we really want to do this again when the stakes are so unbelievably high?
Goddamn. People need to get their heads screwed on straight. She isn’t just a woman, she’s also profoundly hated by a lot of Americans for being so progressive. Why the fuck would we do this to ourselves? I mean America wouldn’t even elect Bernie, the male version of her with a lot more experience.
WE NEED TO START LIVING IN REALITY.
I like AOC. I respect her for what she does. But she’s not going to be president in 2028.
